National
212 congressional Dems call on court to overturn DOMA
In first, Senators join House Dems in saying anti-gay law is unconstitutional
An unprecedented coalition of 212 House and Senate Democrats have joined together in calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act.
In a 35-page brief filed on Friday, congressional Democrats argue DOMA should be struck down because the law should be subject to heightened scrutiny and the law singles out gay and lesbian couples for harm. The case challenging the statute is Windsor v. United States.
“DOMA imposes a sweeping and unjustifiable federal disability on married same-sex couples,” the brief concludes. “It is ‘class legislation’ that lacks any rational connection to legitimate federal interests, thus violating the Fifth Amendmentās equal-protection guarantee.”
While House Democrats have filed friend-of-the-court briefs in cases challenging DOMA at lower appellate courts, the latest brief is unprecedented because for the first time Senate Democrats have signed on as well. The 172 House Democrats who signed the brief were joined by 40 Senate Democrats.
House Democrats who signed the brief include House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who lead the effort to gather signatures, as well as the six openly LGB members of the U.S. House: Reps. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), David Cicilline (D-R.I.), Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Mark Takano (D-Calif.).
Senators who joined in the effort are lesbian Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) as well as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Assistant Majority Leader Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).
The brief devotes significant attention to disputing the arguments in favor of DOMA made by the House Republican-led Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group ā which has taken up defense of DOMA in place of the administration ā particularly BLAG’s argument that gays enjoy political power and thus aren’t a suspect class.
Congressional Democrats take note of how the LGBT people unable has been unable pass legislation to institute federal protections against job bias ā the Employment Non-Discrimination Act ā as an example of their political powerlessness.
“In fact, in the nearly twenty years since it was first introduced, ENDA passed only once in the House and never in the Senate,” the brief states. “That gay men and lesbians have been unable to achieve even the modest goal of obtaining basic protection against employment discrimination ā despite the fact that 89 percent of the American people supports such protection ā shows that BLAG is flat wrong in contending that gay men and lesbians enjoy ‘remarkable political clout.'”
The brief also details harm that DOMA causes same-sex couples who are unable to receive federal benefits of marriage ā as well as the harm the statute causes children living in these families.
“Many married lesbians and gay men raise children together,” the brief states. “DOMA harms them and their children, and affords no benefit to different-sex couples or their children. It thus cannot survive equal protection review.”
Notably, the brief refrains from making the argument that Congress passed DOMA in 1996 out of animus ā a position held by many LGBT advocates ā and instead maintains it was made law because members of Congress at the time didn’t know gay people.
“From our perspective ā including those of us who voted for DOMA ā debate and passage of the law did not necessarily arise ‘from malice or hostile animus,’ but instead from ‘insensitivity caused by simple want of careful, rational reflection or from some instinctive mechanism to guard against people who appear to be different in some respects from ourselves,'” the brief states. “While fear and distrust of families different from our own may explain why DOMA passed by comfortable majorities in 1996, it does not obviate the need for a constitutionally permissible justification for the law.”
Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, commended congressional Democrats speaking out against DOMA before the Supreme Court.
“It’s a key indicator of how indefensible the so-called Defense of Marriage Act is that now literally hundreds of members of Congress are signing a brief repudiating it,” Wolfson said. “These senators and representatives, like the American people they serve, know that the government shouldn’t be assigning second-class status to legally married same-sex couples.”
No Republicans signed the brief. Even though Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) and Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.) have signed on as co-sponsors to legislation that would repeal DOMA ā and penned their names to another brief from 131 Republicans arguing that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional ā their names are absent from the DOMA brief.
Ilan Kayatsky, a Nadler spokesperson, deferred comment on the absence of any Republican names from the DOMA brief to Republicans. Neither Ros-Lehtinen’s nor Hanna’s office immediately responded to a request to comment.
The argument presented in the brief is along the lines of the argument that the Obama administration made against DOMA in the brief the Justice Department filed last month.
On Thursday, the administration also filed a brief before the Supreme Court arguing Prop 8 is unconstitutional in addition to the DOMA brief. However, congressional Democrats didn’t do the same and only submitted on brief on DOMA.
Drew Hammill, a Pelosi spokesperson, said the Democratic leader was focused on building support for the DOMA brief and its argument that DOMA should be subject to heightened scrutiny will assist in efforts to overturn California’s marriage ban.
“The brief provides the congressional membersā perspective on why there is absolutely no legitimate federal interest in discrimination, and why, given the history of how DOMA was enacted, heightened judicial scrutiny is needed for federal laws that discriminate against the LGBT community,” Hammill said. “In making the case for heightened scrutiny, the amicus brief will assist the efforts to overturn Proposition 8.”
Hammill also said Pelosi has spoken out against Prop 8 and “appreciates” the Justice Department’s filing against the constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in California.
“From the outset, Leader Pelosi has strongly opposed Proposition 8, and believes that the legal advocacy by opponents of Proposition 8 has been outstanding,” Hammill said. “The Leader looks forward to the day when all Californians ā and indeed, all Americans everywhere – have the right to marry who they love.Ā She appreciates the Presidentās strong leadership in favor of overturning Proposition 8 and of striking down DOMA.”
Asked in a follow-up email to clarify whether Pelosi believes Prop 8 is unconstitutional, Hammill replied, “She has said so repeatedly.”
The White House
Karine Jean-Pierre becomes Biden’s fourth openly LGBTQ senior adviser
Press secretary’s promotion was reported on Monday
Following White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre’s promotion to a top role on Monday, four of the 10 officials serving as senior advisers to President Joe Biden are openly LGBTQ.
The other LGBTQ members of the president’s innermost circle are White House Communications Director Ben LaBolt, senior adviser to first lady Jill Biden Anthony Bernal, and White House Director of Political Strategy and Outreach Emmy Ruiz.
Jean-Pierre became the first Black and the first LGBTQ White House press secretary in May 2022. She spoke with the Washington Blade for an exclusive interview last spring, shortly before the two-year anniversary of her appointment to that position.
“Jill and I have known and respected Karine a long time and she will be a strong voice speaking for me and this Administration,” Biden said in 2022 when announcing her as press secretary.
Breaking the news of Jean-Pierre’s promotion on Monday, ABC noted the power and influence of the White House communications and press office, given that LaBolt was appointed in August to succeed Anita Dunn when she left her role as senior adviser to the president.
As press secretary, Jean-Pierre has consistently advocated for the LGBTQ community ā pushing back forcefully on anti-LGBTQ legislation and reaffirming the president and vice president’s commitments to expanding rights and protections.
U.S. Supreme Court
Supreme Court begins fall term with major gender affirming care case on the docket
Justices rule against Biden admin over emergency abortion question
The U.S. Supreme Court’s fall term began on Monday with major cases on the docket including U.S. v Skrmetti, which could decide the fate of 24 state laws banning the use of puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors.
First, however, the justices dealt another blow to the Biden-Harris administration and reproductive rights advocates by leaving in place a lower court order that blocked efforts by the federal government to allow hospitals to terminate pregnancies in medical emergencies.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services had issued a guidance instructing healthcare providers to offer abortions in such circumstances, per the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which kicked off litigation over whether the law overrides state abortion restrictions.
The U.S. Court of appeals for the 5th Circuit had upheld a decision blocking the federal government from enforcing the law via the HHS guidance, and the U.S. Department of Justice subsequently asked the Supreme Court to intervene.
The justices also declined to hear a free speech case in which parents challenged a DOJ memo instructing officials to look into threats against public school officials, which sparked false claims that parents were being labeled “domestic terrorists” for raising objections at school board meetings over, especially, COVID policies and curricula and educational materials addressing matters of race, sexuality, and gender.
Looking to the cases ahead, U.S. v. Skrmetti is “obviously the blockbuster case of the term,” a Supreme Court practitioner and lecturer at the Harvard law school litigation clinic told NPR.
The attorney, Deepak Gupta, said the litigation “presents fundamental questions about the scope of state power to regulate medical care for minors, and the rights of parents to make medical decisions for your children.”
The ACLU, which represents parties in the case, argues that Tennessee’s gender affirming care ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by allowing puberty blockers and hormone treatments for cisgender patients younger than 18 while prohibiting these interventions for their transgender counterparts.
The organization notes that “leading medical experts and organizations ā such as the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics ā oppose these restrictions, which have already forced thousands of families across the country to travel to maintain access to medical care or watch their child suffer without it.”
When passing their bans on gender affirming care, conservative states have cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), which overturned constitutional protections for abortion that were in place since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.
The ACLU notes “U.S. v. Skrmetti will be a major test of how far the court is willing to stretch Dobbs to allow states to ban other health care” including other types of reproductive care like IVF and birth control.
Also on the docket in the months ahead are cases that will decide core questions about the government’s ability to regulate “ghost guns,” firearms that are made with build-it-yourself kits available online, and the constitutionality of a Texas law requiring age verification to access pornography.
The latter case drew opposition from liberal and conservative groups that argue it will have a chilling effect on adults who, as NPR wrote, “would realistically fear extortion, identity theft and even tracking of their habits by the government and others.”
National
Lesbian software developer seeks to preserve lost LGBTQ history
Up until the early 2010s, if you searched āBabe Ruthā in the Baseball Hall of Fame, nothing would pop up. To find information on the greatest baseball player of all time, you would have to search āRuth, George Herman.ā
That is the way online archival systems were set up and there was a clear problem with it. Kristen Gwinn-Becker was uniquely able to solve it. āI’m a super tech geek, history geek,ā she says, āI love any opportunity to create this aha moment with people through history.ā
Gwinn-Becker is the founder and CEO of HistoryIT, a company that helps organizations create digital archives that are genuinely accessible. āI believe history is incredibly important, but I also think it’s in danger,ā she says. āLess than 2% of our historical materials are digital and even less of that is truly accessible.ā
Gwinn-Beckerās love for history is personal. As a lesbian, growing up, she sought out evidence of herself across time. āI was interested in stories, interested in people whose lives mirrored mine to help me understand who I was.ā
ā[My identity] influences my love of history and my strong belief in history is important,ā she says.
Despite always loving history, Gwinn-Becker found herself living and working in San Francisco during the early dot com boom and bust in the ā90s. āIt was an exciting time,ā she recounts, āif you were intellectually curious, you could just jump right in.ā
Being there was almost happenstance, Gwinn-Becker explained: āI was 20 years old and wanted to live in San Francisco.ā Quickly, she fell in love with āall of the incredible new tools.ā She was working with non-profits that encouraged her to take classes and apply the new skills. āI was really into software, web, and database development.ā
But history eventually pulled her back. āTech was fun, but I didn’t want to be a developer,ā she says. Something was missing. When the opportunity to get a Ph.D. in history from George Washington University presented itself, āI got to work on the Eleanor Roosevelt papers, who I was and remain quite passionate about.ā
Gwinn-Beckerās research on Eleanor Roosevelt planted the seeds of digital preservation. āEleanor Roosevelt doesn’t have a single archive. FDR has lots but the first ladies donāt,ā she says. Gwinn-Becker wondered what else was missing from the archive ā and what would be missing from the archive if we didnāt start preserving it now.
Those questions eventually led Gwinn-Becker to found HistoryIT in 2011. Since then, the company has created digital archives for organizations ranging from museums and universities to sororities, fraternities, and community organizations.
This process is not easy. āDigital preservation is more than scanning,ā says Gwinn-Becker. āMost commercial scannersā intent is to create a digital copy, not an exact replica.ā
To digitally preserve something, Gwinn-Beckerās team must take a photo with overhead cameras. āThere is an international standard,ā she says, āyou create an archival TIFF.ā
āItās the biggest possible file we can create now. Thatās how you future-proof.ā
Despite the common belief that the internet is forever, JPEGs saved to social media or websites are a poor archive. āItās more expensive for us to do projects in the 2000 to 2016 period than to do 19th-century projects,ā explains Gwinn-Becker, since finding adequate files for preservation can be tricky. āThe images themselves are deteriorated because they’re compressed so much,ā she says.
Her clients are finding that having a strong digital archive is useful outside of the noble goal of protecting history. āIt’s a unique trove of content,ā says Gwinn-Becker. One client saw a 790% increase in donations after incorporating the digital archive into fundraising efforts. āItās important to have content quickly and easily,ā says Gwinn-Becker, whose team also works with clients on digital strategy for their archive.
One of Gwinn-Beckerās favorite parts of her job is finding what she calls āhidden histories.ā
āWe [LGBTQ people] are represented everywhere. We’re represented in sports, in religious history, in every kind of movement, not only our movement. I’m passionate about bringing those stories out.ā
Sometimes queer stories are found in unexpected places, says Gwinn-Becker. āWe work with sororities and fraternities. There are a hell of a lot of our stories there.ā
Part of digital preservation is also making sure that history being created in the moment is not lost to future generations. HistoryIT works with NFL teams, for example. One of their clients is the Panthers, who hired Justine Lindsay, the first transgender cheerleader in the NFL. Gwinn-Becker was excited to be able to preserve information about Lindsay in the digital record. āItās making history in the process of preserving it,ā says Gwinn-Becker.
Preserving queer history, either through āhidden historiesā or LGBTQ-specific archives, is vital says Gwinn-Becker. āThink about whose history gets marginalized, whose history gets moved to the sidelines, whose history gets just erased,ā she prompts. āIn a time of fake news, we need to point to evidence in the past. Queer people have existed since there were humans, but their stories are hidden,ā Gwinn-Becker says.
Meanwhile, Gwinn-Becker accidentally finds herself as part of queer history too. Listed as one of Inc. Magazineās Top 250 Female Founders of 2024, she is surrounded by names like Christina Aguilera, Selena Gomez, and Natalie Portman.
One name stuck out. āNever in my life did I think I’d be on the same list ā other than the obvious one ā with Billie Jean King. That’s pretty exciting,ā she said.
But she canāt focus on the win for too long. āWhen I go to sleep at night, I think āthere’s so much history, and we have to transfer it to the digital,āā she says, āWe have a very small period in which to do that in a meaningful way.ā
(This story is part of the Digital Equity Local Voices Fellowship lab through News is Out. The lab initiative is made possible with support from Comcast NBCUniversal.)
-
World5 days ago
Out in the World: LGBTQ news from Asia, Europe, and Canada
-
Middle East4 days ago
‘I don’t want a genocide to be done on queer people’s behalf’
-
District of Columbia2 days ago
Gay Episcopal minister to be reinstated 40 years after being defrocked
-
Israel2 days ago
Hundreds attend gay IDF soldier’s memorial service